CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,308Electoral Systems and Political ParticipationAmerican Political and Social DynamicsMedia Influence and Politics

Is Polarization a Myth?

Abramowitz, Alan I., Saunders, Kyle L.·2008·The Journal of Politics
DOI 10.1017/s0022381608080493
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This article uses data from the American National Election Studies and national exit polls to test Fiorina's assertion that ideological polarization in the American public is a myth. Fiorina argues that twenty-first-century Americans, like the midtwentieth-century Americans described by Converse, “are not very well-informed about politics, do not hold many of their views very strongly, and are not ideological” (2006, 19). However, our evidence indicates that since the 1970s, ideological polarization has increased dramatically among the mass public in the United States as well as among political elites. There are now large differences in outlook between Democrats and Republicans, between red state voters and blue state voters, and between religious voters and secular voters. These divisions are not confined to a small minority of activists—they involve a large segment of the public and the deepest divisions are found among the most interested, informed, and active citizens. Moreover, contrary to Fiorina's suggestion that polarization turns off voters and depresses turnout, our evidence indicates that polarization energizes the electorate and stimulates political participation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0022381608080493

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Democrats and Republicans have polarized in their attitudes (ideological polarization).

    “citizens who identify as a Democrat have become more liberal while Republicans have become more conservative (Abramowitz and Saunders, 2008).”

    From Factual belief polarization between Democrats and Republicans: source or epiphenomenon of ideological and affective polarization? (2024) · cites this paper as Abramowitz and Saunders, 2008

  • The literature on mass political polarization in the USA has yielded mixed findings about whether ordinary citizens are deeply divided, whether polarization threatens democratic functioning, and the nature of the threat.

    “The body of literature on mass political polarization in the USA has yielded mixed findings: ordinary citizens are deeply divided9,31,35,41–49 or they are not10,29,36,50–54; polarization poses a huge threat to democratic functioning3,11,55, is not a problem at all13,56–58 or the nature of the threat is ambiguous7,59,60.”

    From Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts (2022) · cites this paper as [41]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Abramowitz, A. I., & Saunders, K. L.
Affiliations
  • Emory University (US)
  • Colorado State University (US)
ORCID
Venue
The Journal of Politics
Publisher
University of Chicago Press
Published
2008-04
Volume
70
Issue
2
Pages
542-555
ISSN
  • 0022-3816 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-2508
DOI
10.1017/s0022381608080493
OpenAlex
W2103146267
Cited by
1,308
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 58 · 2025: 108 · 2024: 101 · 2023: 103 · 2022: 127 · 2021: 106 · 2020: 99 · 2019: 92 · 2018: 85 · 2017: 74 · 2016: 68 · 2015: 84 · 2014: 60 · 2013: 40 · 2012: 34
FWCI
145.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
The Journal of Politics (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › American Political and Social Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Media Influence and Politics
Keywords
ideological polarization, public opinion, political attitudes, political participation, voter turnout, partisanship, religious voters, political elites, political information

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review